[87041] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: BGP Security and PKI Hierarchies
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Peter J. Cherny)
Tue Nov 29 18:55:40 2005
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 10:53:50 +1100
To: nanog@merit.edu
From: "Peter J. Cherny" <peterc@luddite.com.au>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On 29-Nov-2005, at 12:16, David Barak wrote:
> Maybe my imagination just isn't good enough: could you
> toss me an example-type of organization where that
> would be problematic?
If we consider non-operators e.g. medium sized commercial or NGOs ...
APNIC have a mechanism in-place, but most of the denizens of the
Swamp are suspicious that if we were to sign an agreement
with APNIC, we'd be giving up some of our historical rights
and exposing ourselves to the risk of reclamation.
Annual account fee (historical resource maintenance) $100.00
http://www.apnic.net/docs/policy/historical-maintain-guide.html
http://www.apnic.net/member/feesinfo.html#non_mem_fee
Until (and if) an ipv6 multi-homed transition is possible,
medium sized organizations here in Oz will continue to use a
mixture of PA and PI space to isolate us from dependence on a
single carrier.
In a country as large as the US, but sparsely populated except for
scattered cities, each with millions of people,
reliable and cost effective service delivery requires that we retain
direct control of routing policy i.e. have our own chunks of PI space,
though having one or more ASs is not necessary.
Back to lurking, pjc
